Mr Keyamo had earlier given the police one week ultimatum to charge the embattled lawmaker over the bribery scandal.
The lawyer named the former Secretary of the fuel subsidy probe Committee, Boniface Emenalo as the 2nd accused person in the charge which was filed before the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court.
Mr Keyamo maintained that the proof of evidence adduced against the accused persons over the alleged role they played in the cash-for-clearance scandal, indicted them of criminal conspiracy, gratification and criminal intimidation contrary to sections 96 and 396 of the Penal Code Act, Laws of FCT, as well as, Section 12(1) (a-b) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, Cap C31, LFN 2004.
According to him, their offence is punishable under section 97 and 387of the two aforementioned Acts, respectively.
The lawyer gave the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke a 6-days ultimatum to either okay the already drafted charge or hands-off the matter to enable him as a private prosecutor to conduct the trial.
In a letter he sent to the AGF alongside a copy of the charge he personally drafted against Misters Lawal and Emenalo, Mr Keyamo, insisted that the AGF must “indicate whether he is prepared to prosecute or not,” on or before the close of official business on Tuesday, January 29, 2013, “to enable me determine my next line of action,” he added.
The letter read:
“My name is Festus Keyamo. I am a Nigerian citizen, legal practitioner, senior member of the Nigerian Bar, private prosecutor, social crusader and critic.
“Last week, I gave a seven-day ultimatum to the Police to commence prosecution of one Farouk Lawan, a member of the House of Representatives and his accomplice, one Boniface Emenalo, for agreeing to and actually accepting gratification from one Femi Otedola in order to doctor the report of the House ad-hoc Committee on fuel subsidy.
“From reports I read in the media after issuing my ultimatum, the Police have passed the buck over to your office for the inaction so far, claiming it has finished the investigation and that your office has just refused to file charges for reasons unknown to the public.
“It is for the above reasons I have prepared a Charge (attached herewith) for the purpose of private prosecution.
“Therefore, consequent upon Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Cap C41, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, I forward herewith the following proof of evidence and documents to you:(1) The Criminal Charge against Farouk Lawan and Boniface Emenalo.
(2) The proof of evidence: (a) A recording of a telephone conversation between Farouk Lawan and Femi Otedola contained in a memory card wherein Farouk Lawan was soliciting or asking for gratification to doctor his report, and appealing to Otedola to keep it secret. (b) The transcript of the said recording. “(c) Court processes (including a sworn testimony on oath) in Suit No. FCT/3839/2012: BETWEEN ZENON PET. & GAS LTD. & ANOR. V. LAWAN & ORS, where the graphic details of how the accused persons solicited for, and received gratification from Femi Otedola are stated. Needless to say that these are just proofs of evidence and the originals shall only be presented during trial.
“May I kindly request that, by virtue of Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Cap. C41, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, you endorse on the Charge whether, having seen the Charge, you are prepared to prosecute Farouk Lawan and Boniface Emenalo for the counts in the Charge or whether you have declined to prosecute at the public instance the counts in the said Charge.
“The position of the law is that, before I commence private prosecution, you should be given the opportunity to prosecute or to decline to prosecute. This is what I have done by this letter.
“I will expect your reply by the close of official business on Tuesday, January 29, 2013, to enable me determine my next line of action.
“I sincerely hope you will make your decision one way or the other as any indecision on your part will amount to a refusal to act as held by the Supreme Court in the case of CHIEF GANI FAWEHINMI V. COL. HALILU AKILU & ANOR: IN RE: ODUNEYE reported in 1987 (4 NWLR) P. 67. In that case, it will be all-clear signal I require to file the Charge.”
Specifically, the 4-count charge Mr Keyamo filed against the duo reads: “That you, Honourable Farouk Lawan and Boniface Emenalo, sometime between January and July 2012 in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of Federal High Court, conspired to corruptly demand and receive the sum of $3,000,000.00 (Three Million US Dollars) as gratification from Femi Otedola, and thereby committed the offence of Criminal Conspiracy contrary to Section 96 of the Penal Code Act, Laws of FCT and punishable under Section 97 the same Act.
“That you, Honourable Farouk Lawan and Boniface Emenalo, sometime between January and July 2012 in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of Federal High Court, corruptly asked for, received and obtained the sum of $620,000.00 (Six Hundred and Twenty Thousand US Dollars) as bribe from Femi Otedola, and thereby committed the offence of gratification by an Official contrary to Section 12(1)(a) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, Cap C31, LFN 2004 and punishable under the same section.
“That you, Honourable Farouk Lawan and Boniface Emenalo, sometime between January and July 2012 in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of Federal High Court, corruptly agreed to receive the sum of $3,000,000.00 (Three Million US Dollars) as gratification from Femi Otedola, and thereby committed the offence of Gratification by an Official contrary to Section 12(1)(b) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, Cap C31, LFN 2004 and punishable under the same section.
“That you, Honourable Farouk Lawan and Boniface Emenalo, sometime between January and June 2012 in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of Federal High Court, threatened one Femi Otedola with injury to his reputation and his companies, with intent to cause alarm to Femi Otedola and to cause Femi Otedola to give you a gratification of $3,000,000.00 (Three Million US Dollars) in order to avoid the said injury, and thereby committed the offence of Criminal Intimidation contrary to Section 396 of the Penal Code Act, Laws of FCT and punishable under Section 387 of the same Act.”
Channels TV
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
Its really really amazing and deeply shameful that this case as glaring as it was has been swept under the carpet.
ReplyDeleteYet Jonathan will open his mouth and say he is a good president. Why would a sane leader allow such under his nose?
Keyamo has forgotten that the person that gives is also punishable under those sections. Farouq will only face your count charges while your client will face your own and that of Nigerians. GEJ knows the reason why he kept quiet. The people invovle are people(oil mugus) that can sponsor 2015 shows. After then he will visit all those subsidy mess. Fahdy2k above and keyamo, wise up.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteKeyamo did not say Otedola was his Client, he came in as a Private Prosecutor. If Otedola is indicted or may I say found guilty along the line, let it be. If GEJ kept queit because of what he intends to gain from these men, then the Spirit of all the pple suffering the effect of their theft shall haunt him till eternity.
ReplyDeleteFaruk & otedola are two foolish corrupt individual that should have the same fate.
ReplyDeleteKeyamo should have joined Femi Otedola in his case if he is really fighting corruption. Or is the giver of bribe a saint and the taker a devil. How very tribalistic you appear Mr Keyamo?
ReplyDeleteThe giver did not commit any crime cos u dont know the conditions and options he was given. More so he may not have a choice than to give.
ReplyDeleteKeyamo your action to prosecute Farouk Lawan & Co is in order but the whole world expects you to also prosecute the giver of the bribe. Or is there any reason on why he cannot be prosecuted? Because even if Farouk asked for the bribe and there is evidence to that effect, it should have been enough grounds to prosecute him, but Femi Otedola having actually given the bribe is also liable for prosecution. I need to be convinced on why Femi Otedola who committed the act of giving bribe to Farouk Lawan irrespective of the circumstances should be shielded from prosecution. Or is Festus Keyamo's fight against corruption going to be one-sided? I am trusting that Keyamo is the crusader of our time and will do the right thing as we progress on this issue.
ReplyDelete@ anonymous 5:02. I dont like otedola, but that does not becloud my judgement. Farouk asked for the bribe, Otedola told security agencies about it and recorded the whole thing. He needed to make sure there was evidence, else farouk could have denied it. even if he was caught asking for the bribe, it would still be difficult to prove in court.
ReplyDelete